Saurabh Singh @ Kumar Saurabh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24654 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2022 Thana- KHAJANCHI HAT District- Purnia ====================================================== SAURABH SINGH @ KUMAR SAURABH Son of Ram Chandra Prasad Singh Resident of village - Kali Path Sipahi tola, P.s.- K.Hat (Madhubani TOP), Distt.- Purnia.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Senior Advocate Mr. Jyoti Ranjan Jha, Advocate For the State :

Ms. Nirmala Kumari, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Fakhruddin Ali Ahmad, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 31-08-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with K. Hat P.S. Case No.31 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 327, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120(B), and 341 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner with the help of other co-accused persons named in the FIR alleged to have prepared a forged Sale Deed No.5844, dated 26.03.2021 in his name of her private house. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24654 of 2022(2) dt.31-08-2022 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner has got five criminal antecedents as stated in paragraph-3 of the bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioner has filed Title Suit No.91 of 2021 before the competent court and the informant has also filed Eviction Suit No.05 of 2015 before the learned court below. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Taking into consideration the nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Sanjay/- U T